netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/2] Two BPF fixes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20170417.155250.1243917459853868743.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:52:50 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     daniel@...earbox.net
Cc:     alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, kubakici@...pl,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] Two BPF fixes

From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 03:12:05 +0200

> The set fixes cb_access and xdp_adjust_head bits in struct bpf_prog,
> that are used for requirement checks on the program rather than f.e.
> heuristics. Thus, for tail calls, we cannot make any assumptions and
> are forced to set them.

Series applied, thanks.

Tail calls bring up all kinds of caching and assumption issues, see my
question in another thread about how register cached SKB parameters
are handled in JITs across tail calls.